Once a gem, now generally forgotten, what could the future hold for Ontario Place?

In 2008, MPP Greg Sorbara was commissioned to chair a study on the future of tourism in Ontario. The findings of the Ontario Tourism Competitiveness Study were released in February 2009, in a report titled Discovering Ontario. Of the 20 recommendations the group proposed, one stood out: the future of Ontario Place.

“Ontario Place is a prime example of an attraction not meeting its potential,” the report stated. “It’s a symbolic attraction for this province and it needs attention.”

They suggested that the parklands be free to the public, that new trails link the site with nearby neighbourhoods, and that Ontario Place transform into a year-round attraction. As well, the authors felt the site should be redeveloped by 2017, in time for the 150th anniversary of Confederation, becoming the province’s “showpiece” and “the flagship of a new era in Ontario tourism.”

Opened in 1971, Ontario Place represents both our idealistic past and our betrayal of it. A masterpiece of modernist architecture by Eberhard Zeidler, who also designed the Eaton Centre, it has been forgotten by the city. Shawn Micallef, author of Stroll and an associate editor of Spacing magazine, says, “it has this wonderful, faded grandeur, which is kind of romantic, but maybe we don’t want it on our waterfront.”

Attendance has plummeted from a high of 2.5 million its inaugural year to less than one million for seven years in a row. So it’s little surprise last week’s news that Ontario Place issued a Request for Information, opening the doors to an extreme makeover, was greeted with a mix of nostalgia, mutters of good riddance and horror at the prospect that some of Toronto’s icons may be lost.

“Everyone has a real emotional attachment to the space, and I think everyone is relieved to see that something is finally happening down there,” says Hugh Mansfield, spokesperson for the revitalization project. “It needs an injection of energy and new ideas.”

But what ideas? The renewal of Ontario Place presents Toronto with an intriguing opportunity: the chance to transform 96 acres of lakefront property.

Though developers have a blank canvas, the new Ontario Place should include educational, recreational, commercial and entertainment components, and showcase Ontario’s green energy initiatives, notes Mansfield. Details on the public consultation process will be announced next week. Proposals will be accepted until Sept. 10. Ideas floated thus far include a university or college campus, a planetarium, a casino and an aquarium, while, in a letter to the Toronto Star, one man proposed an indoor ski hill.

“The idea of theme parks doesn’t really work anymore,” Micallef says. “You can’t really compete with [Canada’s] Wonderland. So it has to be a little more intimate, and maybe a little more urban.”

Perhaps we should revisit the past when deciding the future. Michael McClelland of E.R.A. Architects thinks we should look at Zeidler’s original blueprint.

“My hope would be that they’d reinvest in the original ideas,” he says, “and figure out how to improve them, rather then go, ‘That’s all crap; we’re going to take it all away.’ ”

McClelland also points to Zeidler’s unbuilt Harbour City project, which would have created a neighbourhood of 60,000 people on what is now the Toronto Island Airport; Mansfield says plans that include residential elements will not be dismissed.

Among the mayoral candidates, Joe Pantalone has already said the Cinesphere — home of the world’s first permanent IMAX theatre — should be preserved. Rob Ford told the Post the public should be asked for their ideas, while Sarah Thomson, who agrees the area “needs higher densities,” suggests a “creative village,” featuring live/work studios for artists, among other things.

Babak Eslahjou, an award-winning architect who’s mounting his own campaign for mayor, would like to see Ontario Place and the CNE connected along the waterfront to High Park, which he would extend south to the lake. He’s also adamant the Cinesphere be saved, though he has personal as well as aesthetic reasons: Eslahjou worked for Zeidler between 1986 and 1996, and fondly recalls office parties and dinners at Ontario Place, where he now brings his own children.

“It absolutely has to be saved,” he says. “Our heritage includes all kinds of amazing architecture.”

While dwindling attendance figures have been frequently cited as a reason for the redevelopment, not everything about Ontario Place is failing. The Molson Amphitheatre is perhaps the facility’s prime attraction: Last year, its stage hosted 31 shows for a total audience of 321,163. Approximately 500 concerts will have been hosted at the venue by the end of 2010.

“[Ontario Place’s] infrastructure is falling apart, so that’s got to be upgraded or revitalized or completely torn down and rebuilt,” says Riley O’Connor, chairman of Live Nation Canada, the concert giant who operates the venue. “It’s a gorgeous setting. It should be a destination point for Ontarians.

“It really does not address how people feel or think in this day and age,” he adds. “And even kids — once you get above, say, eight years old, you’re just like ‘What am I doing here?’ ”

O’Connor agrees that Ontario Place should be open year-round, and says they’ve already looked at enclosing part of the amphitheatre for winter use. He doubts redevelopment will include the razing of the amphitheatre, which he thinks would be “short-sighted.”

Now, the province is looking long-term. Eighteen months after his report was first issued, Sorbara is pleased to see change finally coming to Ontario Place. “It’s time to rethink and recast Ontario Place,” he says. “It it has not reinvented itself over the course of the past 40 years, and it’s time now to do something dramatically different.